Pollies Lose their Flight Perks

[Reggie]

Looks like I could be the only one who thinks that this new system is fair.

Oh well

ejb

ejb, I agree with you and the new system. Why should pollied be allowed to earn points when the public servants don't

Also there has been a policy where the pollies where supposed to use their points for government travel, but very few did. The next step was to cut out the earning and get cheaper prices

 

[levelnine]

There appears to be some misinformation circulating in this thread.

It seems to be reasonably clear from media reports (eg Politician travel perks hit in Wayne Swan budget | The Australian) that removing FF points will result in a reduction in cost ($160 million over 4 years).

This is what would be expected. In the area of government I work for, we get SC but no FF points. In return, the government gets a discount on all fares it books with Qantas (unsure of the precise percentage, but I have been told it is reasonable).

 

[ejb]

There appears to be some misinformation circulating in this thread.

It seems to be reasonably clear from media reports (eg Politician travel perks hit in Wayne Swan budget | The Australian) that removing FF points will result in a reduction in cost ($160 million over 4 years).

This is what would be expected. In the area of government I work for, we get SC but no FF points. In return, the government gets a discount on all fares it books with Qantas (unsure of the precise percentage, but I have been told it is reasonable).

What misinformation?

We all know why they are removing points earning....to save money that is obvious.

ejb

 

[Skoogle]

I would laugh if Qantas announced that only those earning FF points were eligible for CL membership.

 

[Hvr]

An interesting situation may arise here. It is my expectation that the Qantas FF system picks up at the fare type (from the fare basis) is one for which the frequent flyer points are not to be provided. But to other OneWorld FF systems pick this up, or are they just looking at the booking class and not the whole fare basis and fare rules?

So would it is possible (though morally dubious) for a person travelling on a fare type where Qantas FF points are not earned to provide an AAdvantage, Asia Miles or another alternate OneWorld FF membership and earn points/miles in that program?

I am in no way suggesting that would be a recommended process and may well result in disciplinary action. However, I am curious as to whether such a process has been considered by those negotiating the special fares, those tasked with enforcing the policy, the airline selling the fares and operators of partner FF programs.

Don't know about international fares, have never been on an international trip for work and doubt I ever will. But there are some domestic circumstances where FF points are awarded and need to be removed. E.g. any time I've ever flown Jet* the points were credited, another example is when I finished the day's work early and went to the airport and got an earlier flight home.

I just email Qantas and ask them to remove the points noting that they were paid for by my public service agency and that I am not entitled to receive the points. They are removed in a day or so.

Failure to do this may be considered a breach of the public service code of conduct with various penalties.

Not worth losing my job for.

About time pollies were held to the same standards they expect from the rest of us.

 

[ejb]

I would laugh if Qantas announced that only those earning FF points were eligible for CL membership.

Remember that CL membership has nothing to do with the QFF promotion.

Having CL membership will ensure pollies keep flying QF even without points.

ejb

 

[Skoogle]

Remember that CL membership has nothing to do with the QFF promotion.

Having CL membership will ensure pollies keep flying QF even without points.

ejb

My comment still stands.

 

[Hvr]

I would laugh if Qantas announced that only those earning FF points were eligible for CL membership.

Huge numbers of CLs aren't allowed to receive FF points at the moment, i.e. any public service employee who is a CL isn't allowed to receive FF points but they still maintain their status.

 

[Mal]

ejb, I agree with you and the new system. Why should pollied be allowed to earn points when the public servants don't

I believe that if one gets them, the other should as well. So yes, the system is fairer from a public sector perspective, and is the correct decision (based on current circumstances).

However, I still can't see why points shouldn't be earned by either pollies or public sector employees. Especially since the double standards that I pointed out earlier in this thread exist.

Yes, the Govt has managed to negotiate a saving based on no points being earned ... shouldn't other companies also be trying to negotiate similar deals? The other pondering I have is whether that "saving" actually relied on not earning FF points. It's quite possible that the savings could have been negotiated without waiving FF points etc.

 

[tuapekastar]

Normandy Mining (before being purchased by Newmont) retained ownership of all points earnt by employees on company funded travel. They had a dedicated person in the Adelaide head office whose job was to set up FF accounts for the employees travelling, and then use the ponts to book required travel when required.

Not agreeing or disagreeing with the policy, but what happens when the person for whom the account is set up earns their own points for self-funded leisure travel? I guess the company will distinguish between the business and leisure travel, and only use the business-accrued points for company business.

That notwithstanding, I wouldn't be particularly keen for someone else (i.e. a company employee) to be administering my FF account, and be privy to what I do and where I go in my personal time. I'd just as soon not earn the points for business traval and keep the company out of it (I guess the company would not like this...).

Or maybe 2 accounts (one business, one personal) could be maintained.

 

[oz_mark]

Yes, the Govt has managed to negotiate a saving based on no points being earned ... shouldn't other companies also be trying to negotiate similar deals? The other pondering I have is whether that "saving" actually relied on not earning FF points. It's quite possible that the savings could have been negotiated without waiving FF points etc.

I don't believe that all the savings come from stopping pollies earn FF points - the other changes take care of that. I think the idea is to remove FF point earnings as an incentive to book with a particular carrier.

 

[ejb]

...
Yes, the Govt has managed to negotiate a saving based on no points being earned ... shouldn't other companies also be trying to negotiate similar deals? The other pondering I have is whether that "saving" actually relied on not earning FF points. It's quite possible that the savings could have been negotiated without waiving FF points etc.

I am sure they got a better deal by taking the points off the table. I also beleive that some mining companies have contracts with QF that also prevent ff points being earnt.

I guess it is up to the companies to arrange this, and the government has done the right thing by trying to reduce the cost of flights.

ejb

 

[medhead]

There appears to be some misinformation circulating in this thread.

This is what would be expected. In the area of government I work for, we get SC but no FF points. In return, the government gets a discount on all fares it books with Qantas (unsure of the precise percentage, but I have been told it is reasonable).

Not misinformationm at all. In my experience with a state government, while there may be savings (that is the reason given for certain travel policies), the actual department that spends the money doesn't see the savings. I'm not sure how this relates to the commonwealth government, but I do note that you only mention a discount for the government, not the department. Sure you might be wondering what the difference, and there is probably little difference for the tax payer. But it terms of departmental operation and budgetting there is a major difference. On a large department travel budget, there is potentially a few percent extra that the department should be able to use for it's operations. Instead that is getting recycled back to Treasury. Dodgy.

Don't know about international fares, have never been on an international trip for work and doubt I ever will.

I had a trans-tasman flight handled perfectly fine, in terms of not getting points, when working with a (different) state government.

I am sure they got a better deal by taking the points off the table. I also beleive that some mining companies have contracts with QF that also prevent ff points being earnt.

I guess it is up to the companies to arrange this, and the government has done the right thing by trying to reduce the cost of flights.

ejb

Yes and I know that one mining company has this on one of their routes (serviced by a contracted public accessable service). The price charged is exactly the same as what is available direct from the airline. The employees are able to add their FF number to the booking and the points credit. There is much speculation that this practice is lead from the top.

 

[Reggie]

Not agreeing or disagreeing with the policy, but what happens when the person for whom the account is set up earns their own points for self-funded leisure travel? I guess the company will distinguish between the business and leisure travel, and only use the business-accrued points for company business.

That notwithstanding, I wouldn't be particularly keen for someone else (i.e. a company employee) to be administering my FF account, and be privy to what I do and where I go in my personal time. I'd just as soon not earn the points for business traval and keep the company out of it (I guess the company would not like this...).

Or maybe 2 accounts (one business, one personal) could be maintained.

The account that was setup by the company was only accessable by the company. An employee was able to set up their own account for personal travel.

 

[Smackbum]

This is purely a PR exercise with no logic to it. I work in the private sector and travel enough (just) to retain Gold FF and along with CC spend (some from work Amex) earn enough points to fund 2-3 tickets to the UK every couple of years. I am happy to accept these perks because lots of the travel is done in non-work hours, and sometimes I am away from my family for up to 2 weeks at a time. For example I just returned from a week in the U.S.A. which netted me 90 SCs and 23K points ... in return for 128 hours of "my" time.

Even with domestic travel the impost can be significant. I am going to Darwin soon, which means an evening flight on the way down (landing just before midnight) and an afternoon flight (landing in time for the Sydney curfew) on the way back. If my employer tried to take my SCs or points off me I wouldn't complain - I would just make sure all travel commenced after 8:30 and completed before 17:30. One trip like that would wipe out the annual savings they might make as it would extend the longer domestic trips by at least a day, and halve the length of the business day on short trips.

Why should Pollies/PS be any different? If we are asking them to travel in addition to their normal work hours and be away from their families then shouldn't they get the same perks as the rest of us?

 

[samh004]

Why should Pollies/PS be any different? If we are asking them to travel in addition to their normal work hours and be away from their families then shouldn't they get the same perks as the rest of us?

Supposedly they’re travelling J on the tax payers expense, so they’re getting benefits there, but I agree somewhat, they’re giving up personal time for a seat only, which seems a little cheap.

 

[Mal]

Supposedly they’re travelling J on the tax payers expense, so they’re getting benefits there, but I agree somewhat, they’re giving up personal time for a seat only, which seems a little cheap.

I'm curious. How is this different to the majority of WP's who fly at company expense?

 

[samh004]

I'm curious. How is this different to the majority of WP's who fly at company expense?

They get to keep the points and SC’s, while this new system says they cannot for the same fare…

 

[Hvr]

I'm curious. How is this different to the majority of WP's who fly at company expense?

They get to keep the points and SC’s, while this new system says they cannot for the same fare…

I think the point (pun always intended ) of having fares with no FF points is that they are lower than fares with them.

Also I suspect government fares would generally be lower than a lot of fares avaialble to private industry due to the buying power of the government.

 

[ejb]

...
Why should Pollies/PS be any different? If we are asking them to travel in addition to their normal work hours and be away from their families then shouldn't they get the same perks as the rest of us?

They applied for a job in Canberra with long hours. How can they expect to be compensated extra when they knew what the job entailed.

If they don't like it they can always find a new job.

ejb